Paul Ryan's Plan for American Decline

Wisconsin Republican's disappearing government

If the foreign adversaries and competitors of the United States imagined a future that would fulfill their most ambitious objectives, it might begin with a government crippled by the House Republican leadership's "Ryan budget" released last week. Followed to its absurd conclusion, this document would lead America toward a withered state, approaching the point where Marxian dreams and Randian dogma converge.

Or at least that's the view suggested by the sober analysts at the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), whose report on the Ryan budget shows debilitating cuts to nearly every department of government today, be it law enforcement and border patrols or scientific research, food safety, environmental protection, federal highways, national parks, weather monitoring, education and all the other essential functions of a great country. There would not be much left for Medicare and Medicaid, either. Social Security would continue in some form, and defense—of course—would increase.

But in a nation stripped of science and infrastructure, with a people demoralized by insecurity, unemployment and inequity, exactly what would be left to defend?

Certainly Ryan and his Republican colleagues will deny that their new budget—like their old budget—would cripple the federal government and render the United States unrecognizable over the coming decades, if implemented. Yet the calculations released by the CBO, a nonpartisan arm of Congress, permit no other conclusion.

Pentagon Spending Would Be Protected

Prepared at the request of Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican who chairs the House Budget Committee, the CBO report indicates that by 2050 federal spending on all functions—except Social Security, health programs and interest payments—would account for no more than 3.75% of gross domestic product (GDP). On defense alone, however, we have never spent less than 3% of GDP during the past 70 years or so; and during those same years, we have spent no less than 8% of GDP on all those functions, including defense. Which means that should Pentagon spending increase drastically, as both Ryan and likely Republican nominee Mitt Romney insist it should, there will be nothing left for anything else.

"The rest of government would literally have to disappear," as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities explains dryly. Is it necessary to recite the details, even in broad outline? No more basic research and no more support for technological progress in defense, communications, medicine, manufacturing, energy or education. No more health care, secondary education or vocational training for veterans. No more reconstruction of decaying roads, bridges, airports, waterways, tunnels, seaports or any other infrastructure that states cannot afford to rebuild on their own. No more national parks, which presumably will be sold off to oil companies, resort developers and other commercial predators. No more oversight of the purity of food and drugs, whether domestic or imported. No further enforcement of the environmental statutes that have restored clean air and water in so many places across the country. No more Federal Bureau of Investigation, no more Immigration and Customs Enforcement and no more Department of Homeland Security—no more federal justice system at all. And very little health care, which would be cut by as much as 75%, leaving tens of millions without insurance coverage.

Is all this starting to sound slightly weird? That is certainly one way to describe the Ryan budget, which evokes the utopian fantasies of both Karl Marx, who predicted the "withering away of the state" after communism, and Ayn Rand, whose hatred of modern government inspired anarchist (or "minarchist") fantasies among many of her admirers. What is truly bizarre is to watch a major political party produce such a document not once but twice—and then to hear this absurd exercise hailed by Washington commentators as "bold" and "patriotic."

Right now the economy is exploding and everyone is getting rich again. My oil well partnerships in Alaska have become a real cash cow. These are just something for the privileged but anyone is allowed to invest and own. The stock market is up. Cost of borrowing is way down. So for those who choose to embrace capitalism, go baby go.
Budgets of 2050 - who gives a sheeeeet. Things like law enforcement and border patrols or scientific research, food safety, environmental protection, federal highways, national parks, weather monitoring, education and all the other essential functions, they will be funded properly. They just won't be overfunded for the previous purposes of make-work jobs and fraud. We will always fund what people want funded or politicians will not get re-elected. I spend a lot of money on political contributions and in the big picture, I am a small donator, usually $5000 or less per person. 95% of the time my guy will vote my way and I don't even have to pick up the phone. But if some renegade crosses me, sides with the Democrats, my boy knows I will be pulling the plug on future contributions.

Isn't that a clear statment of how corrupt the political contribution system is?

"everyone is getting rich again"... people, how many of you feel you are getting rich again? Of course, if you cannot afford to donate to a political campaign, then who needs your voice anyway! That's why the non-contributing class needs to have their right to vote taken away.

A smart business owner is going to choose policy that provides a strong consumer base, more customers to make profit off of while providing desired goods and services. I don't think the Paul Ryan way is going to do that, but it will provide a way for those who invest on Wall Street to take their gains to where those emerging economies that have more room to grow than here.

This article is pure BS. Even Democrats say the current system is unsustainable. In Ryan's plan, NOTHING CHANGES for those 55 and older. Those younger get to choose a style of safety net that fits their needs. This country is going broke when for every dollar it spends 40 cents is borrowed. Thank GOD for Paul Ryan.

The reason Ryan exempts folks 55 & older is to get their votes . It’s the same crap he tried to pass through Congress last year. The plan essentially screws the poor, destroys Medicare, and gives a free pass on taxes to fat-cat corporations. His plan: $5.3 trillion cut from essential social programs that effect everyone from the working poor to senior citizens. While at the same time, Ryan’s plan gives a total of $4.3 trillion in tax cuts to the wealthy 1% in America. In other words, if you’re not as fortunate as Paul Ryan and his fat-cat handlers, then you are royally screwed. It’s estimated that Ryan’s plan would grow the national debt by $4 trillion over his 10-year plan. That’s because he’s going to give additional tax cuts to the wealthy, lower the already basement level corporate tax rate, and allow all those corporations and wealthy individuals to bring their money home from offshore and foreign accounts without having to pay taxes.

I ran through my tax software sometime back, it said that my tax dollar is spent like this... 20% to defense, 4% to veterans and foreign affairs, 16% to welfare (medicaid and food stamps), 9% to unemployment and social services, 36% to Social Security and Medicare, 6% to interest on national debt, 2% on law enforcement and general government, 7% on infrastructure and community development.

It took us 50-60 years to get into this mess, it is not going to be fixed in a single 4-year presidential term.

The only reason to "change" in such short time is to use several years of hard recovery to effectively remove a segment of the population from being included on the "Road to Prosperity".

Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws are like saying "open season" on those who do not fit into your community, it encourages a segregation that says stay in your allotted place whether it is prosperous or not. If not prosperous, do not even think of rising out of it. No due process, no right to tell your side of the story to a jury of your peers, no presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Closer to street justice and living in fear. Get that established on private home ground and it won't take long to stretch it to cover your entire government region.

Look at science and technology, it is no longer the exclusive holding of Americans. Look at who wins Nobel Prizes, plenty of foreigners and non-whites. No more research for the common good, if it cannot be monetized, then it should not be allowed (that's the game of privatization). If The polio vaccine had been developed by today's Big Pharma, then the maximum profit plan would have been to keep the poorest ranks un-vaccinated, so that the disease will still be in the wild, the rest of us will be blackmailed into having to get our vaccinations to keep from getting the infection from those still walking among us. Money spent on an unnecessary avoidance instead of on something worthwhile. On-going cash flow instead of a one-time cure and elimination of the disease from a future comeback.

Private enterprise should be there to take care of our wants, where the most should go to those who can afford it, "more or better wants" is the way to reward success. But the delivery of basic needs should be done by agencies not dependent on profit, thereby making it available for all. Since when should "being alive" be a want instead of a need. -- The point is to make sure these needs are properly and efficiently delivered, have the ability to fire those who are not able to do the job. PS - these basic needs should not be at a level that makes hard-working people envious. Even medical care will be lower cost if we stop subsidizing junk foods that make us unhealthy and in need of expensive services.

As long as we define growth as being funded by debt to be paid off tomorrow on someone else's dime, we cannot sustain. Long term sustaining would need to have as much being trickled and/or redistributed back down as what rises to the top. What the GOP is desiring is mere short-term postponement, allow the wealthy to get their profits out of the game and leave the casino before the casino goes bankrupt. In their plan, a few chosen win, but the the majority must lose.